Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up July 22 - July 28, 2024

MUJEEB UL ASHRAF DAR Vs MUSHTAQ AHMAD WANI 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 197

ABDUL MAJID KIRMANI & ANR. Vs BILAL AHMAD KIRMANI 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 198

Kamran Ali Khan Vs State of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 199

National Insurance Company Vs Zahoor Ahmad Sofi 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 200

JAVAID AHMAD KUMAR Vs UNION OF INDIA 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 201

Union Of India Vs M/s Onkar Nath Bhalla and Sons Contractor Pvt. Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 202

UT of J&K Vs M/s Hindustan Constructions Co. Limited and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 203

KAMRAN KHAN AND & ORS. Vs BILKEES KHANAM 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

Mubashir Manzoor Vs Mushtaq Ahmad Wani 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 205

Sandeep Vijh Vs State through Drug Inspector Baramulla 2024 (JKL) 206

Mehrajud Din Ganie and others Vs Mst. Mymoona and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 207

Judgments/Orders:

S.143A NI Act | Application Of Mind, Consideration Of Certain Factors By Magistrate Essential To Decide Quantum Of Interim Compensation: J&K High Court

Case Title: MUJEEB UL ASHRAF DAR Vs MUSHTAQ AHMAD WANI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 197

Quashing an order of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (1st Additional Munsiff), Srinagar, for granting interim compensation under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised on the proper application of mind on part of the Magistrate to decide the interim compensation.

CPC | Nature Of Issues Crucial To Attract Applicability Of Section 10, Not Nature Of Relief Sought: J&K High Court

Case Title: ABDUL MAJID KIRMANI & ANR. Vs BILAL AHMAD KIRMANI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 198

Emphasising the importance of the nature of issues in civil suits the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that its not the nature of relief being sought but the nature of issues which are involved in the two suits that are crucial to attract applicability of Section 10 of the CPC.

Writ Petitions Do Not Lie Against Show Cause Notices Unless It Transcends Jurisdiction, Is Issued With Premeditated Mind: J&K High Court

Case Title: Kamran Ali Khan Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 199

Quashing an order of cancellation of a lease deed after issuing a premeditated show cause notice the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that a writ petition does not ordinarily lie against a show cause notice unless it is issued with a premeditated mind.

Employees Compensation Act | Admission Of Appeal Challenging Compensation Award Subject To Raising Substantial Questions Of Law: J&K High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Company Vs Zahoor Ahmad Sofi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 200

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the scope of an appeal against an award passed under the Employees Compensation Act is significantly limited, being permissible only if a substantial question of law is involved.

CRPF Rules | Essential To Establish Actual Service Of Notice To Delinquent Personnel Before Ordering Dismissal From Force: J&K High Court

Case Title: JAVAID AHMAD KUMAR Vs UNION OF INDIA

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 201

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that it is essential to establish proof of “actual service of notice” to delinquent personnel before ordering their dismissal from the force.

Arbitration Award Attains Status Of Civil Court Decree After Three Months If No Challenge Is Posed: J&K High Court

Case Title: Union Of India Vs M/s Onkar Nath Bhalla and Sons Contractor Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 202

Emphasising the significance of the amended Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which allows for the enforceability of non-stayed awards the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that an arbitration award attains the status of a civil court decree after three months if no challenge is posed.

Any attempt To Modify Award Under Section 34 is not permissible: J&K High Court

Case Title: UT of J&K Vs M/s Hindustan Constructions Co. Limited and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 203

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court set aside a judgment from a subordinate court modifying an arbitral award while underscoring that under Section 34 of the J&K Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997, courts lack the authority to modify arbitral awards and can only either uphold or set aside the awards.

[DV Act] Arrest Warrants Unjustified In Domestic Violence Cases Since Proceedings Are Civil In Nature: J&K High Court

Case Title: KAMRAN KHAN AND & ORS. Vs BILKEES KHANAM

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar while hearing a petition challenging the issuance of such warrants, observed that proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act) are inherently civil in nature and not criminal.

NI Act | Unless Accused Pleads Not Guilty, Interim Compensation U/S 143-A Cannot Be Granted: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mubashir Manzoor Vs Mushtaq Ahmad Wani

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 205

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed three orders passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, awarding interim compensation to a complainant under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act). The Court held that interim compensation can be granted only after the accused pleads not guilty to the accusation and the Magistrate applies his mind to relevant factors.

S.34 Drugs & Cosmetics Act | Proof Of Actual Responsibility Of Company At Time Of Offence Crucial To Attract Culpability: J&K High Court

Case Title: Sandeep Vijh Vs State through Drug Inspector Baramulla

Citation: 2024 (JKL) 206

Quashing a criminal complaint under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that not every person connected with the company may fall within the ambit of the provisions of section 34 of the Act of 1940.

Court Can Invoke Power Of Review To Correct Inadvertent Errors, Misrepresentation Even After Judgement Is Pronounced: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mehrajud Din Ganie and others Vs Mst. Mymoona and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 207

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that once a judgment is pronounced or an order is made, the court becomes “functus officio”, meaning it loses control over the matter, and the judgment or order becomes final, however, with the doctrine of review standing as an exception to this rule.